Legitimizing change: Understanding and leveraging institutional tensions in later stage energy transitions to empower social innovation

The dominant governance structures in Western societies have faced significant challenges in responding to the imperative of transitioning toward energy systems that are both just and sustainable. In response to this imperative, many innovative governance structures have emerged, ranging from living labs and arenas to challenge-prizes, gamification, and the construction of future scenarios. One of these developments in governance innovations was transition governance, an approach founded on principles such as systems thinking, adaptability, and back-casting and developed in the early 2000s. Over the past two decades of transition governance having been implemented, critiques have surfaced regarding its effectiveness in promoting legitimate political processes, due to its arguably ‘post-political’ character. Meanwhile, there is a growing recognition that energy transitions are entering a new phase, marked by the movement of governance niches toward institutionalization, with a heightened emphasis on issues of justice. Both of these matters require transition governance to develop a stronger response on how it can politicize its methods for shaping future energy systems. Addressing these tensions, this paper delves into four empirical cases of transition governance in practice to answer the overarching research question: "How can we understand institutional tensions in later stage energy transition and leverage them to empower social innovations?" Positioned as the introduction section of my dissertation, this paper positions this question within a larger debate on accelerating energy transitions, understanding institutionalization and the role of legitimacy, institutional learning and power. All five cases were developed using transdisciplinary research methods. The first case scrutinizes the institutionalization process of reflexive governance arrangements in six European cities (De Geus et al., forthcoming). The second case discusses the instrumentalisation (i.e. institutionalisation) of the concept of social innovation (Wittmayer et al, 2020). The third case investigates how transition management practices can be legitimized within representative democracies while preserving their innovative potential (De Geus et al., 2022). The fourth case explores how reflexive monitoring can assist urban policy makers in addressing issues of energy justice (De Geus et al., in preparation). Finally, the fifth case experiments with methods to develop and apply knowledge on power in the context of energy transitions (De Geus et al., 2023). This paper positions paper evaluates the extent to which the concepts of institutionalisation, power, reflexivity and legitimacy can account for the political dimensions of governance, as well as what assumptions are found to underlie these cases and concepts. For instance, how might the availability of time and capability of individuals affect their ability to achieve profound deliberation and navigate conflict through the proposed approaches? We also underscore the potential of the cultural and art sector in contributing towards innovative methods for achieving the objectives of the approaches discussed. By synthesizing insights from these cases, this paper contributes to a nuanced understanding of the complex interplay between political dimensions and transition governance, offering valuable insights for policymakers, scholars, and practitioners engaged in the pursuit of just and sustainable energy transitions.